“borderline significant”

Longer episode duration was associated with a small borderline significant reduction in treatment effectiveness (β = 0.24, p = 0.05), irrespective of treatment protocol (episode duration × Treatment: β = −0.23, p = 0.31); no difference was observed between patients with MDD vs.

Coronary artery disease was borderline significant as a determinant of renal dysfunction (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.82, p = 0.05) (Table 2 ).

After excluding marital and employment statuses and living arrangement from the covariate list, the likelihood ratio test comparing models of covariates and vision (Covar + Vision) to covariates only (Covar Only) became borderline significant ( P = 0.05) for reading speed and was statistically significant ( P = 0.03) for balance.

Only the DFS benefit associated with the use of NAC was borderline significant (HR =0;83; 95% CI, 0.68–1.00; P=0.050).

When two groups were defined a posteriori based on the insulin values of LDIGIT (120–150 min) , there was a borderline significant group by time interaction for PAI-1 ( p = 0.05; n = 49) and the change in PAI-1 was greater in the insulin-resistant group (177, 61 for HMD vs. 128, 52 ng/mL for HWD; p < 0.001) than in the insulin-sensitive group (137, 80 for HMD vs. 113, 39 ng/mL for HWD; p = 0.02).

The difference in proportions in reported findings from the CXRs between the two groups was borderline significant (p=0.05).

The scores between wave 1 and wave 2 DCI patients did not differ significantly, although the difference in scores for CD45+ cells was borderline significant ( p = 0.05).

A borderline significant difference was observed among subgroups ( p = 0.05) ( Figure 6 ). 3.4.3.

Controlling for average distance to health facility, number of antenatal care visits, education of women, and parity, planning to save money was associated with giving birth with the assistance of a skilled provider, although the association was borderline significant (p=0.05).

Additionally, low SpO2 showed a borderline significant association with mortality (CHR: 5.24, 95% CI, 4.71–7.73, p = 0.05) (Table 6 ).

6A ) and were borderline significant for OS (HR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.059–1, p = 0.05; Fig. 6B ).

Furthermore, when analyzed as a continuous variable, higher CRP levels showed a borderline significant association with an increased risk of mortality (aOR = 1.038, 95% CI (1.000, 1.077), p = 0.050), but not with any of the other outcomes ( Table 3 ).

There is a borderline significant effect (p=0.05) of adding cold air to induce a decrease in FEV 1 in patients with asthma.

Secondary Outcomes: Total and Aerobic Activity Times In phase I (Table 2 ), the unblinded and blinded groups were not significantly different in modifying their total activity times, whereas there was a borderline significant smaller decrease in aerobic time in unblinded patients (differential 8 minutes; 95% CI, 0 to 16; P =0.05).

A less granular perspective was available for diabetes medications in replication cohort, but the use of any diabetes medication was borderline significant ( P = 0.05) with a higher proportion of intermittent carriers reporting the use of any diabetes medications.

However, higher cIMT at baseline had a borderline significant association with higher LVDF at follow-up ( p = 0.05). 3.4.

Cell survival after treatment with 677C is not significantly different from cells treated with the control CT677 at concentrations of 100 and 200 n M ( P >0.05), and shows only small but borderline significant differences at 300 and 400 n M ( P =0.05 and P =0.04, respectively).

The only borderline significant (treatment effect = 1.2; 95% CI, 0.0-2.4; P = .05) differences seen in these sensitivity analyses were between the groups receiving 400 mg and 200 mg minocycline hydrochloride.

There was no significant difference between CD8 memory T-cell subsets ( Figure S3A ); however, for CD4 memory a significant lower level of Tem (CD45RA-CCR7-, p=0.02), and a borderline significant higher level of naïve (CD45RA+CCR7+, p=0.05) T-cells was detected in MACDZ compared to IGRA-HC ( Figure 2B ).

VGF showed a different pattern with evidently lower values in patients with AD dementia than in control subjects (β = −0.46 [SE 0.19]) and in patients with MCI (−0.93 [SE 0.22]), whereas the difference between patients with MCI and control subjects was only borderline significant (β = 0.47 [SE 0.20], p = 0.05).

When stratified by study designs, RCTs showed a significant effect in favor of MIS (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00–1.51; I 2 = 77%); however, the difference is borderline significant ( p = 0.05).

The same tendency was observed after stratifying on sex and age groups, although the results were borderline significant (e.g. the oldest heavy smoking women: differences in regression coefficient = 4.64 per % change in fat mass, 95% confidence interval (CI): −0.07, 9.29; p = 0.050).

Results Compared to UC, mindfulness showed a borderline significant improved 6MWT (effect size, meters: 13.2, 95%CI: -0.02; 26.4, p = 0.050).

After adjustment for age, a significant f E/I difference between TSC and TDC remained [ F (1,36) = 6.79, p = 0.01, partial η 2 = 0.16], and the difference in absolute power became borderline significant [ F (1,36) = 4.0, p = 0.05, partial η 2 = 0.1].

FICB demonstrated a borderline significant increase in the risk of quadriceps weakness (RR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.02 to 10.37, P = 0.05).